Back
JYOTI SINGH
Prime Road Solutions Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Leela Sethi Through Its Spa Sandeep Kumar Sethi – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Jyoti Singh, J. (Oral)
C.M. APPL. 6977/2023 (exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. Application stands disposed of.
C.R.P. 42/2023 & C.M. APPL. 6976/2023 (stay)
3. This revision petition has been filed assailing the impugned order dated 14.12.2022, passed by the Trial Court, whereby an application filed by the Petitioners herein under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC has been dismissed holding that the plaint cannot be rejected at the threshold. Petitioners are Defendants before the Trial Court and Respondent is the Plaintiff and parties are hereinafter referred to by their litigating status before the Trial Court, for the sake of convenience.
4. Plaintiff, claiming herself to be an absolute and exclusive owner of the suit property filed a suit for recovery of possession, arrears of lease rent and mesne profits/damages against the Defendants. Defendant No. 1 is a Company while Defendant No. 2 is the Director of the said Company. Desirous of taking the suit property on lease, Defendant No. 2 approached Plaintiff's late husband, in February, 2017 and inspected the suit property for residential purpose. A Lease Agreement was executed on 04.03.2017 and was signed by the
Landlord can obtain possession of premises upon clear admissions about tenancy relations and formal lease termination, regardless of tenant's claims of extensions based on rent acceptance.
A plaint must be read meaningfully to determine if it discloses a cause of action; issues of jurisdiction and limitation are to be resolved at trial.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of admissions in the written statement and the adherence to procedural requirements for amendment applications.
Suit for possession and suit for claiming damages for use and occupation of property are two different causes of action.
The court ruled that a plaint cannot be rejected summarily under Order VII Rule 11 CPC without determining if it discloses a cause of action, especially when limitation is a mixed question of law and....
Clear and unambiguous admissions by the defendant in a suit for possession can warrant a judgment on admission under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC. The expiration of a lease by efflux of time does not amount t....
It is settled law that Court has to look into contents of plaint while invoking Order VII Rule 11 of CPC and it cannot look into defense.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
